header-logo header-logo

21 May 2009
Issue: 7370 / Categories: Legal News , Damages , Costs , Employment
printer mail-detail

Straw to regulate CFAs

Costs

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) is clamping down on “contingency fee agreements”, where “no win no fee” lawyers extract a large proportion of their client’s damages for excessive legal fees.

The damages-based arrangements are most common in employment tribunal proceedings and are largely unregulated. The MoJ intends to use the Coroners and Justice Bill, currently before Parliament, to introduce proper regulation to protect against unfair or unreasonable agreements.

The new regulations are likely to include: a cap on the percentage of damages that can be recovered by the legal representative; a requirement that legal representatives provide claimants with clear and transparent information on total costs; a requirement that legal representatives clarify the deductions made from the claimant’s award which are to go to the representative as their fee for taking on the case; and a requirement that they provide explicit information on alternative methods of funding.

The justice secretary, Jack Straw, says: “These arrangements—unlike, for example, conditional fee agreements—have been without statutory regulation because of an anomalous and long standing interpretation of the law which has classified proceedings in employment tribunals as ‘non-contentious’.”

The department is due to publish a consultation paper with more details.

(For more on costs see this issue pp 737–748.)

Issue: 7370 / Categories: Legal News , Damages , Costs , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll